Sunday, February 19, 2017

Teasing and Bullying is Harming
our Students Psychologically and Academically:
Here's How to Change this Epidemic through Behavioral Science and Evidence-based
Practices

Dear Colleague,

Introduction

The issue and impact of teasing, taunting,
bullying, harassment, hazing, and physical aggression on students’ feelings of
safety and security in their schools, their academic engagement in the
classroom, and—for some—their academic achievement and graduation have been
well-chronicled over the past 25 years or more.While many different legal and other definitions exist for these acts, it
is not always clear when teasing becomes taunting, taunting becomes bullying,
and bullying becomes hazing, and hazing becomes harassment.

For this reason, while this Blog focuses on
“bullying,” it is essential to recognize that we really are discussing a
continuum that varies in severity and/or intensity from teasing through
physical aggression.

_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _

A Definition and the
Incidence of Bullying

Relative to schools, Bullying is
defined as:

A form of repeated aggression where one or
more students socially, psychologically or emotionally, physically or
behaviorally, or sexually harass or harm other students (a) to a significant
degree during one or more incidents, or (b) repeatedly over a period of
time.More specifically, bullying can
include physical aggression; verbal aggression—including persistent teasing,
taunting, and threats; virtual aggression—such as through cyberbullying; the
more subtle or indirect “aggression” that results in social exclusion; or
aggression that is sexual, sexually motivated, gender, or gender identity
(e.g., gay, lesbian, gender confused) related.Typically, acts of bullying are unprovoked, and the bully is perceived
as stronger or as having more power than the victim

While some surveys report more students
experiencing bullying in their schools each year, a recent Data Point
from the U.S. Department of Education [CLICK HERE for Report; July 2016], revealed that
22% of a nationally representative group of student (aged 12 to 18 and
in Grades 6 to 12) said that they were bullied in school, on school
property, on the school bus, or going to or from school during the 2012-2013
school year (the year with the most-recent national data).

Specifically, students were asked if they
were: (a) made fun of, called names, or insulted; (b) the subject of rumors;
(c) threatened with harm; (d) pushed, shoved, tripped, or spit on; (e) pressured
into doing things they did not want to do; (f) excluded from activities on
purpose; and/or victimized by having their property destroyed on purpose.

An additional analysis from this survey [CLICK HERE for Report; July
2016] found that, when comparing bullied versus non-bullied students,
bullied students attended schools with higher incident levels of the following:

… the presence of gangs,
knowing another student who brought a gun to school, the availability of drugs
and alcohol, and seeing hate-related graffiti on school property. Relative to drugs,
students reported that they could get any of the following at school:
marijuana, crack or other forms of cocaine, uppers, downers, LSD, PCP, heroin,
prescription drugs illegally obtained without a prescription, or other illegal
drugs.

Moreover, another study by the American
Educational Research Association (see Section below) noted that:

* Students with disabilities are twice as
likely to be identified as both perpetrators and victims as students without
disabilities; and

* Gay, lesbian, bisexual, and questioning
students experienced more bullying (79% versus 50%) and more sexual harassment
than heterosexual students.

_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _

The Impact of Bullying on Students

In 2013, the American Educational Research
Association published a summary of the bullying research titled, Prevention
of Bullying in Schools, Colleges, and Universities.In this Report, the following “Measurable
Negative Consequences of Bullying” were identified:

* Bullied students experience higher rates
of anxiety, depression, physical health problems, and social adjustment problems
that can persist into adulthood

* Bullied students become less engaged in
school, and their grades and test scores decline

* In high schools where bullying and teasing
are prevalent, the student body is less involved in school activities, performs
lower on standardized tests, and has a lower graduation rate

* Students who engage in bullying are more
at-risk of poor school adjustment and delinquency, and higher rates of criminal
behavior and social
maladjustment in adulthood

* Students who are bullied but who also
engage in bullying (so-called “bully-victims”) have more negative outcomes than
students in bully-only or victim-only groups

* Cyberbullying (through its many social media
vehicles) has become more prevalent, increasing the potential for more
frequent, intensive, and widespread levels of bullying for targeted students

* Cyberbullied students experience negative
outcomes similar to those experienced by their traditional counterparts, including
depression, poor academic performance, and problem behavior.
Cyber-victimization is also linked to suicidal ideation, and students with
these thoughts are more likely to attempt suicide

_ _ _ _
_

The longitudinal impact of bullying
especially on students’ academic achievement was confirmed in a recent article,
“Peer Victimization Trajectories from Kindergarten through High School:
Differential Pathways for Children’s School Engagement and Achievement,”
published three weeks ago (January 30, 2017) in the Journal of Educational
Psychology.

This article analyzed the differential
impact of chronic bullying on 383 Illinois public school students (190 boys,
193 girls) whose social, emotional, behavioral, and academic progress was
tracked from 1992—when they were in kindergarten—to when they were in high
school.

The results indicated that the 24% and
18% of the students who experienced chronic and increasingly moderate levels of
bullying had lower academic achievement levels, a greater dislike of
school, and less confidence in their academic abilities.

The 26% and 32% of the children who
experienced decreasing levels of bullying over time, or little or no bullying,
respectively, showed fewer negative academic effects.

While all of the students attended schools
in Illinois at the beginning of the study, they were living in 24 different states
by the fifth year of the study.

Approximately 77% of the participating
students were white, 18% were African-American, and 4% were Hispanic, biracial,
or had other backgrounds.Approximately
25% lived in families below the poverty line, 37% had low to middle incomes,
and 39% had middle to high incomes.

_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _

State Laws and (New) Federal (ESEA) Statutes
are Not Enough

The negative impact of school-related
bullying on students’ academic and social, emotional, and behavioral status and
progress is notable because, by November, 2011, 47 states and the
District of Columbia (DC) had already passed state laws or policies related to
bullying in schools.

Moreover, ten of these states including
cyberbullying in their statutes, and 35 states including “electronic
harassment.”Indeed, at least 46 states
(including the DC) now have state laws or policies that require schools to have
cyberbullying policies, and 39 of these states (not including the DC) require
school sanctions.Many of these states
had these policies in place well before 2011.

The Point is:When contrasting the fact that
one-fifth to one-quarter of our country’s students reported some level of
bullying during the 2012 to 2013 school year, and the fact that virtually every
state had an “anti-bullying” law or statute at least one year before, it seems
clear that the state laws or statutes were NOT substantially affecting the depth,
breadth, and impact of school bullying.

* These programs, processes, and actions
need to involve all school staff, students, parents/guardians/families, and
communities;

* The goal should NOT ONLY be the
elimination of all teasing, taunting, bullying, harassment, hazing, and
physical aggression in or infiltrating into our schools;

* BUT ALSO, a simultaneous focus on
increasing everyone’s interpersonal, social problem-solving, conflict
prevention and resolution, and emotional coping skills.

_ _ _ _
_

This is essential for the health, mental
health, and wellness of all of our students, but it is similarly essential for
our students’ academic progress and proficiency.

It is also now required by the
recently reauthorized Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)--which
requires states to annually report
the number of bullying incidents in every school. . . as well as to develop
plans on how they will reduce bullying and harassment, student restraints and
seclusions, and student suspensions and expulsions—all of which (expanding from
the points above) disproportionately affect students of color and with
disabilities.

Critically, this approach must align with
(and receive the personnel, training, and other supports for) the social,
emotional, and behavioral science required for its success.

Moreover, as noted above, “success” is
defined not just as the elimination of teasing, bullying (etc.)—but the
simultaneous increase in students’ social, emotional, and behavioral
self-management skills.

_ _ _ _
_

Briefly, the “science” underlying the
prevention and effective response to teasing, bullying (etc.) is embedded in
five interdependent components:

* Staff, Student, and Parent/Community relationships and supports
that establish Positive School and Classroom Climates

* Explicit Classroom and Common School Area Expectations
supported by Social, Emotional, and Behavioral Skill/Self-Management
Instruction (that are embedded in preschool through high school "Health,
Mental Health, and Wellness" instructional activities)

* Application—across all school settings, all student
peer groups, and all continuing situations of persistence, significance, or
crisis

_ _ _ _
_

More descriptively, and applied to Teasing,
Taunting, Bullying, Harassment, Hazing, and Physical Aggression, these
components involve the following:

Positive
Relationships and School/Classroom Climate

Effective schools and communities are
committed to and work consciously, planfully, and on an on-going basis
to develop, reinforce, and sustain positive and productive relationships so
that community-wide, across-district, within-school, and inside-classroom interactions
create and sustain positive and supportive climates.

When students, staff, parents/guardians, and
the community-at-large consistently demonstrate these positive and productive
relationships. . .

. . . are understood, accepted, and
celebrated. . . and teasing, bullying (etc.) decrease or do not occur at all.

_ _ _ _
_

Positive
Behavioral Expectations and Skills Instruction

Students—from preschool through high
school—need to be taught the social, emotional, and behavioral skills that will
help them succeed in the classroom, across the common areas of the school, with
peers and adults, and out into the community.

These skills (e.g., Listening, Asking for
Help, Ignoring Distractions, Dealing with Teasing, Responding to Peer Pressure,
Beginning a Difficult Conversation, Safely Walking away from a Fight, Handling
Fear or Anxiety) must be taught and learned, practiced and mastered, and
applied and infused in a systematic and continuous way.

When this is done, and when supported by
peers and parents, students learn the interpersonal, social problem-solving,
conflict prevention and resolution, and emotional control and coping skills
that they need. . .

. . .
and this helps them avoid, prevent, and respond to moderate levels of teasing,
bullying (etc.).

_ _ _ _
_

Student
Motivation and Accountability

For the skill instruction described above to
“work,” students (and existing peer groups) need (a) to be motivated to
demonstrate their positive social, emotional, and behavioral skills; and (b) to
consistently be held accountable (and make restorations) for their antisocial
(i.e., teasing, bullying, etc.) interactions.

Motivation is based on two component parts:Incentives and Consequences.But critically, these incentives and
consequences must be meaningful and powerful to the students—both
individually and as embraced by the different peer groups in a school.

Accountability occurs reactively when consequences
and restoration is needed, but it is strongest when students and the peer group
hold themselves proactively accountable for consistently demonstrating their
prosocial behavior without the need for extrinsic motivators.

Too often, schools create “motivational
programs” for students that involve incentives and consequences that the
students could not care less about.Thus, while it looks good “on paper,” it bears no weight in facilitating
students’ prosocial behavior, and preventing their antisocial behavior.

Thus, students need to be active partners in
developing any classroom or across-school motivation/accountability system.

In the end, when students and their peers
are motivated to demonstrate their interpersonal, social problem-solving,
conflict prevention and intervention, and emotional control and coping skills,
teasing and bullying (etc.) does not occur, and positive relationships and
school/classroom climates result.

_ _ _ _
_

Consistency

Consistency is a process.It would be great if we could “download” it
into all students and staff. . . or put it in their annual flu shots. . . but
that’s not how it works.

Consistency needs to be “grown” over time, so
that it eventually becomes internalized and sustained.It is grown through effective strategic
planning with explicit implementation plans, good communication and
collaboration, sound implementation and evaluation, and consensus-building
coupled with constructive feedback and change.

This is not easy. . . but it is
necessary for success.

Relative to teasing and bullying (etc.), consistency
must occur within and across all four of the other scientific components.

That is, in order to be successful, staff
(and students) need to (a) demonstrate consistent prosocial relationships
and interactions—resulting in consistently positive and productive
school and classroom environments; (b) communicate consistent behavioral
expectations, while consistently teaching them; (c) use consistent
incentives and consequences, while holding students consistently
accountable for their appropriate behavior; and then (d) apply all of these
components consistently across all of the settings and peer groups in
the school.

Moreover, consistency occurs when staff are
consistent (a) with individual students, (b) across students, (c) within their
grade levels or instructional teams, (d) across time, (e) across settings, and
(f) across situations and circumstances.

Critically, when staff are inconsistent,
students feel that they are treated unfairly, they sometimes behave differently
for different staff or in different settings, they can become manipulative—pitting
one staff person against another, and they often emotionally react—some getting
angry with the inconsistency, and others simply withdrawing because they feel
powerless to change it.

Said a different way:Inconsistency undercuts student
accountability, and you do not get the behavior (or it occurs inconsistently or
differentially)—relative to teasing and bullying (etc.) that you want in class
or across the school.

_ _ _ _
_

Applications
to All Settings and the Peer Group

The last component focuses on how the
previous four components are applied to preventing and addressing teasing and
bullying (etc.) across all settings, different peer group
interactions, and persistent or significant acts of teasing and
bullying (etc.).

Relative to the first area, it is important
to understand that the common areas of a school are more complex and
dynamic than classroom settings, and that most teasing and bullying (etc.)
occur in schools’ common areas.

Indeed, there typically are more multi-aged
or cross-grade students, more social interactions, more space or fewer physical
limitations, fewer staff and supervisors, and different social demands in a
school’s hallways, bathrooms, buses, cafeteria, and on the playground (or
playing fields).

As such, the social, emotional, and
behavioral interactions that occur in the classroom are very different when put
into “multi-dynamic” common school area settings.

Accordingly, students need to be taught
how to demonstrate their interpersonal, social problem-solving, conflict
prevention and resolution, and emotional control and coping skills in each
common school area.

Moreover, the training needs to be tailored
to the social demands and expectations of these settings.

_ _ _ _
_

Relative to the second area, it is important
to understand that the peer group is often a more dominant social and
emotional “force” than the adults in a school.As such, the other four components need to focus both on individual
students, as well as on the various peer groups in a school.

Truly, when both individual students and
different peer groups in a school are trained, motivated, and reinforced for
holding each other accountable for their prosocial behaviors, everyone
will be more successful relative to the goals and outcomes of a school-wide and
community-based teasing and bullying (etc.) initiative.

_ _ _ _
_

Finally, in the face of persistent and/or
significant acts of teasing and bullying (etc.), every district and/or
school needs a School Discipline Committee whose members are trained in
assessing the underlying reasons for the acts in question, and linking the
results to strategic (i.e., Tier II) or intensive (i.e., Tier III)
interventions.Eventually, this
multi-tiered approach may need to target community or systemic issues, staff or
peer group issues, and/or aggressor, victim, or bystander issues in order to
ameliorate the persistent or significant acts.

Without effective Tier II and Tier III
responses to persistent and/or significant incidents of teasing and bullying
(etc.), the commitments to and success of an entire teasing, taunting,
bullying, harassment, hazing, and physical aggression initiative can be undermined.Too often, teasing and bullying (etc.)
programs only implement at the Tier I levels— thereby completely ignoring the
training and resources needed to address both existing and/or future Tier II
and Tier III needs.

_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _

To Prevent and Respond to Bullying, You Need Good
Science

While there are many who have developed
programs and approaches that they tout as addressing bullying in the schools, the
vast majority of them have not been independently and objectively field-tested
for a long enough time, with participating student and comparison/control
groups, in different geographic settings, and under varying circumstances.

Moreover, the vast majority of them have not
integrated the underlying scientific principle and components described above.

Given this. . . even though some
bully-program authors may point to “research” that they say “validates” their
program. . .

* Their “research” may not be sound (that
is, reliable and valid);

* It may not be field-sensitive (that is,
conducted under conditions that replicate the realities of our schools and
classrooms); and

* It may not be transferrable to most other
schools (because of different student, staff, or school characteristics or
conditions)

_ _ _ _
_

What this means is that districts and
schools must do their own due diligence—independently evaluating the
bullying programs they are considering.

In doing this, before purchasing their
preferred program, districts and schools must ensure that their program is
scientifically sound, and has a high probability of delivering the
outcomes expectedwith THEIR students and staff.This is a necessary cost- and time-effective
step—one needed before investing the money and time (e.g., for professional development,
implementation, and evaluation) that accompanies all programs.

None of this is to be argumentative,
disparaging, or elitist.

The fact is:Anyone can do research (exceptional,
acceptable, questionable, or shoddy) on a bullying program, post it on a
website, and market it to the public.Districts
and schools need to do their due diligence to discriminate the exceptional and
acceptable, from the questionable and shoddy.

Beyond the “time and expense” issue noted
above. . . more importantly, this is a student health, mental health, and
wellness issue.

_ _ _ _ _

Summary, a Free Webinar, and a Free District
Bully Policy Sample

The prevalence of bullying and its social,
emotional, behavioral, psychological, and academic impact on students of all
ages creates a compelling “moral imperative” for immediate action in every
school across America.

But the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act’s requirements also establish this as a mandate.

Districts and schools need to recognize that
initiatives to prevent and respond to teasing, taunting, bullying, harassment,
hazing, and physical aggression must be anchored in the behavioral and
psychological science of social, emotional, and behavioral self-management and peer
group interactions.

As such, districts and schools must
independently apply the science, as embedded in the components described above,
to any program or approach that asserts that it has and can effectively—due
to its own research and practice—help schools to effectively address this area.

_ _ _ _
_

But
beyond, teasing and bullying (etc.), it is important for districts and schools
to understand, that the behavioral science and the components above, are the
same components that also address such issues as:

Thus, based on our work all across the
country—work that resulted in our approaches being designated as
evidence-based in 2000 by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), there are
important extended and beneficial effects to when school bullying is addressed
by using the science-based components above.

_ _ _ _
_

Free Resources.Because of the importance and impact of these
issues across our country, we would like to give you two additional free resources.

Resource 1:A few years ago, I presented a national
webinar on Teasing, Taunting, Bullying, Harassment, and Physical Aggression:Prevention, Strategic Intervention, and
Crisis Management.

You can watch this webinar on your own or
with other colleagues below:

_ _ _ _
_

Resource 2:Once again, a few years ago (2012), I
researched all of the relevant state statutes and selected school policies
around the country in this area, and integrated them into a sample Teasing,
Bullying, Harassment Policy for a School Board or School District.

You can download a free copy of this sample
policy state for your own use by CLICKING
HERE and looking down the page at the fourth block of free resources
on our website.

_ _ _ _
_

We
hope that this BLOG, the reviewed research and practice, and the free resources
are helpful to you.

With the ESEA requirements (on bullying and
in other critical academic and social areas) kicking in in the next school
year, we all have a great deal of planning, training, instruction, assessment,
intervention, and evaluation coming up.

If I and my colleagues can help you in any
of these areas, we are happy to provide a free one-hour consultation conference
call to help you to clarify your needs and directions on behalf of all of our
students.

This is a critical strategic planning and
budgeting time for all schools and districts.Let’s make this time the most productive possible—for our students,
staff, schools, parents, and communities.

And
let’s review and renew of approaches to teasing, taunting, bullying,
harassment, hazing, and physical aggression—to rid our schools of these
interactions, while replacing them with prosocial skills and behaviors that
help students to be personally and academically successful.

Connecting with Howie

Follow by Email

About Me

Howard M. Knoff, Ph.D. is the creator and Director of Project ACHIEVE.After 22 years as a university professor and over 12 years as a federal grant director for a state department of education, he continues his national work as a full-time national consultant, author, and presenter.

Dr. Knoff is recognized nationwide as an expert in the following areas:

·School Improvement and
Turn-Around, Strategic Planning and Organizational Development

·Differentiated Academic
Instruction and Academic Interventions for Struggling Students

·Social, Emotional, and
Behavioral Instruction and Strategic and Intensive Interventions for Challenging
Students

·Multi-tiered (RtI)
Services, Supports, and Program

·Effective Professional
Development and On-Site Consultation and Technical Assistance

From 2003 through 2015, he was the Director of the federally-funded State Improvement Grant (SIG; 2003-2009) which then became the State Personnel Development Grant (SPDG; 2009-2015) for the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE). These grants funded the state-wide scale-up of Project ACHIEVE--especially its school improvement, positive behavioral support, and multi-tiered RtI service system components. Through the ADE's Elementary and Secondary Education Act flexibility process, Project ACHIEVE was the state's school improvement model for all Focus schools.

Prior to that, Dr. Knoff was a Professor of School Psychology at the University of South Florida (USF, Tampa, FL) for 18 years, and Director of its School Psychology Program for 12 years. He also was the creator and Director of the Institute for School Reform, Integrated Services, and Child Mental Health and Educational Policy at USF, and was instrumental in leading the program to the accreditation of its doctoral program by the American Psychological Association.

Project ACHIEVE is a nationally-recognized school
effectiveness/school improvement program that has been designated a National
Model Prevention Program by the U. S. Department of Health & Human
Service’s Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
(SAMHSA).Over the past 30 years, Howie
has implemented Project ACHIEVE components in thousands of schools or school
districts—training in every state in the country.He has also been awarded over $21 million in
federal, state, or foundation grants for this work, and recently received two
School Climate Transformation grants and one Elementary and Secondary
Counseling grant from the federal government to support work in Pennsylvania,
Michigan, and Kentucky.

Dr. Knoff received his Ph.D. degree from
Syracuse University in 1980, and has worked as a practitioner, consultant,
licensed private psychologist, and university professor since 1978.Dr. Knoff is widely respected for his
research and writing on school reform and organizational change, consultation
and intervention processes, social skills and behavior management training,
Response-to-Intervention, and professional issues.

He has authored or co-authored 18 books,
published over 100 articles and book chapters, and delivered over 1,000 papers
and workshops nationally—including the Stop & Think Social Skills
Program (preschool through middle school editions) and the Stop &
Think Parent Book:A Guide to Children’s
Good Behavior through Cambium Learning/Sopris West Publishers and Project
ACHIEVE Press, respectively.

Dr. Knoff has a long history of working
with schools, districts, and community and state agencies and
organizations.For example, he has consulted with a number of state departments of
education, the Department of Defense Dependents School District during Desert
Storm in 1991, and the Southern Poverty Law Center.He has also served as an expert witness in
federal court five times, in addition to working on many other state and local
cases—largely for legal advocacy firms who are representing special education
and other students in need.

Specific to
school safety issues, Dr. Knoff was on the writing team that helped produce Early
Warning, Timely Response:A Guide to
Safe Schools, the document commissioned by President Clinton that was sent
to every school in the country in the Fall of 1998; and he participated in a
review capacity on the follow-up document, Safeguarding our Children: An
Action Guide.

A recipient of the Lightner Witmer Award
from the American Psychological Association's School Psychology Division for
early career contributions in 1990, and over $21 million in external grants
during his career, Dr. Knoff is a Fellow
of the American Psychological Association (School Psychology Division), a Nationally
Certified School Psychologist, a Licensed Psychologist in Arkansas, and he has
been trained in both crisis intervention and mediation processes.Frequently
interviewed in all areas of the media, Dr. Knoff has been on the NBC Nightly
News, numerous television and radio talk shows, and he was highlighted on an
ABC News' 20/20 program on "Being Teased, Taunted, and
Bullied."

Finally, Dr. Knoff was the 21st President of the National Association of
School Psychologists which now represents more than 25,000 school psychologists
nationwide. He is constantly sought after for his expertise in a wide variety of school,
psychological, and other professional issues. You can e-mail him at: knoffprojectachieve@earthlink.net